WHEELING – A federal judge ruled Oct 17 that the Environmental Protection Agency must comply with a federal code requiring the agency to evaluate the impact of its air pollution regulation on the coal industry’s workforce.
U.S. District Judge John Preston Bailey ruled that the EPA’s actions caused harm to coal mining communities.
The plaintiffs claimed that their, and their more than 7,200 employees, financial livelihood depended on a continuing domestic market for coal and that the EPA’s actions have caused a reduced market for coal, which threatens their economic viability, according to the judge’s order and opinion.
The plaintiffs alleged that the actions of the EPA have had a “coercive effect on the power generating industry,” essentially forcing them to discontinue the use of coal.
“This court finds these allegations sufficient to show that the injuries claimed by the plaintiffs are fairly traceable to the actions of the EPA,” the opinion states. “While the EPA argues that such would only be traceable to the earlier actions of the EPA rather than the failure of the EPA to conduct employment evaluations, the court cannot agree.”
The claimed injuries, while in part traceable to the prior actions of the EPA, may also be fairly traceable to the failure of the EPA to conduct the evaluations.
“Congresses’ purpose in enacting the requirement for the evaluations was to provide information which could lead the EPA or Congress to amend the prior EPA actions,” the opinion states.
Bailey has ordered the EPA to file within 14 days a plan and schedule for compliance to the federal code, both generally and in the specific area of the effects of its regulation on the coal industry.
The lawsuit was first filed in 2014 by Murray Energy Corporation; Murray American Energy; the American Coal Company; American Energy Corporation; the Harrison County Coal Company; KenAmerican Resources Inc.; The Marion County Coal Company; The Marshall County Coal Company; The Monongalia County Coal Company; OhioAmerican Energy Inc.; The Ohio County Coal Company; and UtahAmerican Energy.
The plaintiffs claimed that Gina McCarthy, the administrator of the EPA, was required to conduct continuing evaluations of potential loss of shifts of employment that may result from the administration or enforcement of the provision of the Clean Air Act.
McCarthy did not take those actions and, despite notice of her obligation to do so, she failed to comply, according to the suit.
Her failure to comply harmed the plaintiffs by delaying evaluations that will prevent or impede EPA’s continued efforts to reduce the market for coal, directly harming the plaintiffs and preventing them from obtaining and using the evaluations to protect their interests in ensuring a continuing domestic market for coal and protecting the jobs of the more than 7,200 employees, according to the suit.
The plaintiffs were represented by Geoffrey K. Barnes, J. Van Carson and John Lazzaretti of Squire Sanders; and John E. Jevicky and Jacob A. Manning of Dinsmore & Shohl.
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia case number: 5:14-cv-00039